Hypercalcemia worsened after vitamin D supplementation in a sarcoidosis patient: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: There are many causes of hypercalcemia, with hyperparathyroidism and malignancy accounting for 90% of cases. Sarcoidosis and the intake of vitamin D supplements may also cause hypercalcemia, although the occurrence rate is low if only one is involved. We herein report a sarcoidosis patient who developed hypercalcemia after taking cholecalciferol (vitamin D supplement) for a year. PATIENT CONCERN: A 62-year-old Japanese man presented with hypercalcemia and acute kidney injury along with symptoms of fatigue and appetite loss while being followed up for sarcoidosis. DIAGNOSES: We determined that a combination of cholecalciferol supplementation and sarcoidosis had led to hypercalcemia for several reasons. First, hypercalcemia had not been noted when this patient had first been admitted due to sarcoidosis-related respiratory failure several years earlier, which we presumed that was the highest sarcoidosis disease activity. Second, low serum 25-OH Vit.D3 and high 1,25-(OH)2 Vit.D3 levels were noted despite cholecalciferol supplementation for a year, suggesting that 1-α-hydroxylase overexpression caused by sarcoidosis accelerated the conversion from 25-OH Vit.D3 to 1,25-(OH)2 Vit.D3. INTERVENTIONS: Although initially resistant to preservative management, the hypercalcemia promptly improved after starting corticosteroid treatment. OUTCOMES: Hypercalcemia and acute kidney injury were normalized after corticosteroid treatment. LESSONS: We should be aware of patients' medications, especially in patients with granulomatosis disease. The concomitant measurement of 25-OH Vit.D3 and 1,25-(OH)2 Vit.D3 levels is useful for determining the cause of hypercalcemia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".